 |
 |
Miles Fidelman ([log in to unmask]) is right, of course: we need a new regulatory regime and other changes so that information highways aren't just for shopping networks and the like; I hope that the people at the White House will pay heed. In case readers don't know, a major White House statement on networks quoted his Center for Civic Networking, which had released a vision paper on the information highways. And maybe, just maybe, someone will listen. Jock Gill, are you tuned in and ready to pass on your downloads to other Clintonians? By any chance, have you also been reading Prescott Smith's Ednet postings about schools without enough phone lines for Internetting? Or about other gaps in the National Information Infrastructure? Of course, decent telcom regs should be just a start. Even with the best laws on the books, and with good people to enforce them, big corporations all too often enjoy the upper hand. It is a simple matter of resources. Cable and phone companies can hire the very best legal talent and spend millions amassing the facts to make their cases. Money doesn't prevail always, but it wins more than it should. Moreover, technology is often friendlier to the regulated than to the regulators. Officials cannot keep up with all the surprises that companies spring. Just look at the proposed Bell Atlantic-TCI merger. "Oh, man, Holly Jesus," the Washington Post quoted an FCC official the other day. What to do? One other answer, I suspect, is to make the government even more of a buyer of some telcom-related services than it is now. Washington could take advantage of its bargaining power in new ways--as a volume purchaser for educational publications, newspapers, magazines and some other content-originators, which would then sublease lines for their electronic editions. Such a practice would be in an old tradition and help preserve The Word. For decades, the government has granted favorable postal rates to publishers and others, regardless of political beliefs. The Nation has accepted them. So has National Review. Neither would be as viable without special rates. And neither, to my knowledge, has stopped speaking its mind about Clinton. Oh, and, yes, I'm highly in favor of newspapers and magazines being able to charge fees for fresh editions and run ads in them. In addition, I believe that we should update the publics library metaphor and have the feds pay for back clips, so that everyone could eventually get the information. The same centralized virtual database could also store books and educational software available for free or for subscriptions based on family income. For more information, see teleread.txt (150K), the latest version of which I'll be happy to e-mail to anyone reading this note. I tell how many librarians, in many cities, could run the database and reflect local interests. The system could even allow publishers and writers to bypass the librarians by gambling enough money up front. Teleread.txt also explains how to drive down the cost of reading-computers--and use the same technology for smart electronic forms that could reduce the cost of dealing with the government. So we could cost-justify the telcom discounts and the databases. At any rate, pun intended, I'm delighted that Miles and like-minded people are plugging away on such questions as the cost of access and information in this era of mega-mergers. I'd like to keep reminding them, however, that regulation is not an all-purpose cure, as I know they'd agree. We must also RI government to take advantage of the new technology in a way that benefits Americans everywhere, not just in rich areas. Steve Cisler at Apple did a splendid job of illustrating the challenges of spreading information around in a fair way. Researching material for a posting a year or two ago, he learned that Shasta County in California spent $2.51 per capital on library materials in 1988. Beverly Hills spent $87.46. I'd hope that Miles and others would be open to new ways to bridge the Shasta-BH gap. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- David H. Rothman "So we beat on, boats against [log in to unmask] the current...." 805 N. Howard St., #240 Alexandria, Va. 22304 703-370-6540(o)(h) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------